dns_delete_record

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description itself must convey the behavioral profile; the word 删除 makes the destructive nature clear and the schema provides exact parameters. It does not mention irreversibility or error behavior when the record ID is invalid, so it is adequate but not richly transparent.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single compact sentence leads with the action, then specifies the scope and provides the ID lookup pointer. Every element contributes value with no redundant text.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a two-parameter delete tool with fully documented schema and a clear record-ID acquisition path, the description is nearly complete. The main missing context is failure behavior and explicit irreversibility, which would matter more with additional complexity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema already documents both parameters fully (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces that recordId comes from dns_list_records but adds no new parameter semantics beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb (删除) and resource (解析记录), scoping the action to a single record under a specified domain by record ID. This clearly differentiates it from dns_create_record and dns_list_records.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It gives concrete usage context: delete by recordId under a domain, and explicitly points to dns_list_records as the way to obtain the record ID. It does not enumerate when-not-to-use cases, but the operation is unambiguous enough.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.